Jane Austen Book Club - Book number 1, Persuasion.

[Mathor]

I always wonder if she had quite finished polishing this book, especially at the start, its a bit all over the place, and Sir Walter is as you say completely ridiculous. I find him one of her very few unconvincing characters.

i don't find it ridiculous at all (except in the fact that Austen was pretty gifted for being able to paint the picture for such real and honest characters that were truly that ridiculous). The fact is, there are people like that. When someone is rich enough that an inheritance or a person's "wealth" can be their income, their children's income, and their children's children, and on and on, then it is really hard to see any value of honest work and hard to see why impoverished people are in poverty, and even less, have any sort of respect for those people. I'm on chapter 11 currently, and I find this to be the most satirical of all Austen's books. It is much more a social commentary than a love story. I enjoy it, as Anne rarely ever talks, and the book is mainly featured in dialogue where Anne eavesdrops on the conversations of others. The characters are more real than I could have ever have expected from Austen, so I disagree that this book wasn't polished. I think it was polished from an overall story and readable sense. I think there might have been some grammatical things she might have changed, but i think this story works perfectly. To say that it is 'rushed' as many people say, I would completely disagree. It is SO good.

[Niamh]

I agree Mathor. In my opinion, it is by far her best work.
I'm sure, she probably would have done extra tweeks to it prior to publication to iradicate any errors, but unfortunately she died a year before it was published.

[kiki1982]

i don't find it ridiculous at all (except in the fact that Austen was pretty gifted for being able to paint the picture for such real and honest characters that were truly that ridiculous). The fact is, there are people like that. When someone is rich enough that an inheritance or a person's "wealth" can be their income, their children's income, and their children's children, and on and on, then it is really hard to see any value of honest work and hard to see why impoverished people are in poverty, and even less, have any sort of respect for those people. I'm on chapter 11 currently, and I find this to be the most satirical of all Austen's books. It is much more a social commentary than a love story. I enjoy it, as Anne rarely ever talks, and the book is mainly featured in dialogue where Anne eavesdrops on the conversations of others. The characters are more real than I could have ever have expected from Austen, so I disagree that this book wasn't polished. I think it was polished from an overall story and readable sense. I think there might have been some grammatical things she might have changed, but i think this story works perfectly. To say that it is 'rushed' as many people say, I would completely disagree. It is SO good.

I agree with that. When I had just finished it, I couldn't help thinking of Anne and Wentworth as Lizzy and Darcy, only Anne and Wentworth were a lot realer. They were not people with one character trait, but they were rather real people with a personality.

Anne's father is ridiculous, but you could meet the man. You would need to do a lot of research before being able to meet a real Mrs Bennet or Mr Bennet.

At the same time, her plot in Persuasion is a lot less Austenesk: there is no horrible secret (SPOILER only a little at the end, maybe, comparable to the very end o S&S), but the story just develops as it develops.

I thought Austen found rest, and I think might have forgiven her Mr Darcy/Wenworth for abandoning her. (See my thread Oh my God!)

[prendrelemick]

Oh dear, here I am writing negative posts about a book I love, from a writer I regard as the best ever.

I think my problem with Sir walter could be the un-Austin way he is presented. Her ridiculous characters usually betray themselves through their conversations, like Anne's sister Mary does. With Sir Walter we are more or less told he is ridiculous. She is usually less overtly cruel to her characters. This is just a fleeting impression I have, as I become emerged in the perfections of the book.

[Mathor]

Oh dear, here I am writing negative posts about a book I love, from a writer I regard as the best ever.

I think my problem with Sir walter could be the un-Austin way he is presented. Her ridiculous characters usually betray themselves through their conversations, like Anne's sister Mary does. With Sir Walter we are more or less told he is ridiculous. She is usually less overtly cruel to her characters. This is just a fleeting impression I have, as I become emerged in the perfections of the book.

but the more cruel to them she is, the more she admits their obvious imperfections. Imperfections are what make characters great! The irony and satire of this novel is what makes it so brilliant.

[Niamh]

I think highlighting everyone elses flaws is meant to Make Anne and Wentworth, but mainly Anne, stand out...make them genuinely appear worthy as a Heroine and Hero.

[kiki1982]

SLIGHTLY SPOILER





Both are not at all perfect though, mainly in deceiving themselves they are not a chow-case of self-honesty.

I will say no more...

[prendrelemick]

but the more cruel to them she is, the more she admits their obvious imperfections. Imperfections are what make characters great! The irony and satire of this novel is what makes it so brilliant.

But that is my point. That is why I tried to highlight the word "overtly", she is often cruel in a deliciously subtle and ironic manner. In Sir Walters case she is unusually direct in her disapprobation.

[Zee.]

There is a point in the novel i have just reached i'd like to discuss soon. I think it'd be good if we could focus on things that hm.. get us thinking, i'll explain later when i've had more of a read

[prendrelemick]

I think highlighting everyone elses flaws is meant to Make Anne and Wentworth, but mainly Anne, stand out...make them genuinely appear worthy as a Heroine and Hero.

I think that too, but I think her highlighting of Sir Walter, seems a bit rushed.

and now I shall read on..

[wessexgirl]

I have listened to the audio version today at work, and loved it. I am reading it too, so I'll come back and discuss more later, but I was struck just how much Austen, in the guise of Anne, (or am I reading too much into this?), states so overtly about the position and nature of women. I won't say too much as some may not have got that far, (it's quite near the end), but I was shown again how on the ball Austen was about women's role, in the sense that it was such a modern statement. I am thinking also about Mary's reaction when she wants to go to out and her son is injured. I know she can sound selfish, but she says something along the lines of (paraphrasing), that why should she stay at home, while he goes out? She can't do anything. I know she's a silly, selfish woman, and she expects Anne to stay and tend to him, but the whole speech sounded so modern. That's why Jane has stood the test of time though isn't it? A classic is a classic because it speaks to us now, it has universal truths and themes.

[Mathor]

A lot of really interesting stuff is happening at my current place in the book, but I do not want to comment until i get a little further into the story. This book is amazing!

[JBI]

spoilers bellow, be warned, I'm going to give away much of the plot and ending:





Well the whole plot, I think, is about the hypocrisy of the romance - before, when Anne had the better prospects, she rejected Wentwroth, because of the importance she put in the value of "good opinion", rather than in her own judgment, and perhaps a tad of prejudice at the economic prospects of Wentworth - when the situation reverses however, the novel is able to really drive the points home - Wentworth is rich, whereas Anne's prospects and fortunes are waning. She no longer looks pretty, she no longer has much too offer the latter, and all her good opinion and whatnot is worthless.

In the end, I think the real lesson is that all this foolishness over looks and titles is a load of crap next to the important things in life - the second chance at romance seems to highlight that redemption can be found however, and that one, though they make mistakes, can, perhaps, in the end learn from them, and mature accordingly, to a point where they can make their own decisions confidently.











Spoilers over:

As for the beginning - I think it comes off as a tad slow because of the editing of the text - the book itself wasn't as refined as earlier works because it was never fully edited by Austen. I personally found the listing of stuff a tad boring in the beginning, and all the talk about Sir Walter perhaps a tad dry. I think also, that this text comes off as a little bit subtler than Pride and Prejudice, for instance, in that the jokes are more thought out and developed, rather than snappy - as fits the mood of the protagonist, who is more melancholic and nostalgic in the beginning, rather than fire-spirited and sharp-tongued like Eliot, or immature and self-centered like Emma.

[mollie]

spoilers bellow, be warned, I'm going to give away much of the plot and ending:





Well the whole plot, I think, is about the hypocrisy of the romance - before, when Anne had the better prospects, she rejected Wentwroth, because of the importance she put in the value of "good opinion", rather than in her own judgment, and perhaps a tad of prejudice at the economic prospects of Wentworth - when the situation reverses however, the novel is able to really drive the points home - Wentworth is rich, whereas Anne's prospects and fortunes are waning. She no longer looks pretty, she no longer has much too offer the latter, and all her good opinion and whatnot is worthless.

In the end, I think the real lesson is that all this foolishness over looks and titles is a load of crap next to the important things in life - the second chance at romance seems to highlight that redemption can be found however, and that one, though they make mistakes, can, perhaps, in the end learn from them, and mature accordingly, to a point where they can make their own decisions confidently.











Spoilers over:

As for the beginning - I think it comes off as a tad slow because of the editing of the text - the book itself wasn't as refined as earlier works because it was never fully edited by Austen. I personally found the listing of stuff a tad boring in the beginning, and all the talk about Sir Walter perhaps a tad dry. I think also, that this text comes off as a little bit subtler than Pride and Prejudice, for instance, in that the jokes are more thought out and developed, rather than snappy - as fits the mood of the protagonist, who is more melancholic and nostalgic in the beginning, rather than fire-spirited and sharp-tongued like Eliot, or immature and self-centered like Emma.

Hypocrisy doesn't come into it, and is a grossly harsh reading of Anne's actions. If the novel has a central theme, it is that even those whom we trust implicitly, and who genuinely have our best interests at heart, and whose good sense and judgment should make them an excellent advisor can mislead us to disaster.

[prendrelemick]

Miss Austin is addictive. I can feel the endorphins kicking in as I read on.